Whither On Health Care?
Regular readers know that I favor a system that provides health care to all Americans. I also recognize that it will cost money!!! Long ago here, I noted that supporters (mainly Democrats) needed to fess up to the higher taxes that will be needed to pay for such a plan. I also noted that some of those increases could probably be offset by spreading the expenses around. (I'll come to that in a moment) Right now we have what looks to me like a chaotic situation, not only in health care itself, but in Congress over what to do about "the chaos." What is especially troubling to me is that this administration came to power touting health care reform, but when push came to shove, they seem to have abdicated to Congress, just as they did with the "stimulus package." They now look like they've got to get spilled milk back into the bottle, and that is one daunting task. The President's popularity was one thing that seemed to guarantee some sort of reform, but now I'm not so sure. This issue may well be the most studied of any in American society, as it has been going on for many decades. I was a kid when they were talking about it, and now that I'm....ah....37 1/2.....okay....let me get my fingers UNcrossed, so I can proceed. Anyway, it has been going on and on. Over all of those years, the premature deaths and the suffering that could have been prevented will never be known, but I think we all know that the numbers are high.
There seems to be no clear message at this time. I realize politics is politics, but I don't see how you have both "free market" run health care, and some sort of "public" insurance for a segment of the population. At present, we have "free market" run health care. Premiums have tripled in just the last nine years, according to what I've heard on television. The outlook is for more of the same. Out-of-pocket expenses, usually in the form of deductibles or non-covered items, for those with health insurance have risen dramatically, too, even though premiums have tripled!!! Again, from what I've heard on television, take it for what its worth, supposedly these costs have escalated about 60% during the same time period. Polls show that Americans across the political and economic spectrums feel that the system is out of whack.
Just as I noted that "health care for all" will cost more, health care now is costing lots more, and it isn't for everyone! If you're fairly well off financially, you'll probably be okay, no matter the cost increases, but many Americans are not well off financially, and even if they have insurance at present, it is costing them more, and will cost them more next year, and the year after, and the year after that; AND, if they lose their job, they likely won't be able to maintain that insurance themselves. Or, if their employer tries to cut expenses, they may have to pick up a bigger share of the cost, or suffer benefit cuts in their plan. Despite what some may think, I'm not for government being involved in everything, but it has to be involved in some things, since the free market system doesn't always work right either!!! Remember, for three decades we've heard how great free markets are, and now we're in a terrible economic situation, the likes of which we haven't seen since the last free market escapade ended in the Great Depression.
To me, the only way to get this whole thing done is to have "single payer" health care that is administered by the government. I see no reason that free market competition can't still be in place in delivering the various aspects of health care. If you're on Medicare or Medicaid, I'm sure some can tell of horror stories about billing foul ups, etc,^^^ but I'll also bet that people with private insurance can tell you similar stories. Why? Because whether the government or private companies administer things, they have one thing in common....they're staffed by HUMAN BEINGS....failings and all!!!
On the offsets to personal costs and increased taxes that I mentioned above, if for example, you now pay let's say, $7500 per year for insurance, MAYBE you'll only pay $3500 in taxes under a new system, and you'll have NO insurance premiums.*** Why? All taxpayers would then be contributing to "the system," so expenses would be shared. If you own a business and pay most of the costs for your employees, you COULD also see substantial reductions in overall costs; that is, higher taxes, but no insurance premiums. From what I can tell, if we have some sort of "mixed" insurance system; that is, private insurance, but also some sort of public plan, I have a feeling many people will get zapped twice; higher taxes to pay for those unable to afford "free market" insurance, and also higher premiums on their own polices, which seems to pretty much be guaranteed anyway, if no reform is enacted. (A word history is below)
^^^So if you support the current system for other Americans, or want only "free market" solutions, what if we take away your government administered Medicare or Medicaid and put you on a system of "free market" principles? I'll bet you don't like that idea!
***I say "maybe," because the reality is, I DON'T know. For a country as large as the United States, my pocket calculator isn't big enough to handle such figures. To me too, just like with energy prices, there needs to be some kind of temporary cost control until things are figured out. For you Republicans, don't lay an egg; Richard Nixon imposed price controls and the country didn't suddenly fall off the map, and remember, I said "temporary." The greedy will be appalled, because they won;t be able to keep their little hands in things. That's what this all comes down to in the end folks....MONEY!
Word History:
Keen-This seems to go back to the Indo European root "gn." The Old Germanic offshoot had "kan," which also gave English "can;" that is, meaning "able to do." It seems that what became "keen" originally meant "clever, wise, skilled" (as you can see, all with that sense of being able to do something) but also developed a sense in the Germanic dialects of "brave, bold, daring." In Old English is was "cene," retaining those before mentioned meanings. Close English relatives, German and Dutch, have "Kühn" and "koen," respectively, but both have only retained the "bold, daring" meaning. This meaning died out in English, as did the meaning "clever, wise," and it was replaced during the 1300s by the meaning "eager," as "I'm keen to do something," or "I'm not too keen on that." Further, English developed a different take unlike the other Germanic languages during the 1200s, with the meaning "sharp," as in "a keen blade," or even "a keen mind."
There seems to be no clear message at this time. I realize politics is politics, but I don't see how you have both "free market" run health care, and some sort of "public" insurance for a segment of the population. At present, we have "free market" run health care. Premiums have tripled in just the last nine years, according to what I've heard on television. The outlook is for more of the same. Out-of-pocket expenses, usually in the form of deductibles or non-covered items, for those with health insurance have risen dramatically, too, even though premiums have tripled!!! Again, from what I've heard on television, take it for what its worth, supposedly these costs have escalated about 60% during the same time period. Polls show that Americans across the political and economic spectrums feel that the system is out of whack.
Just as I noted that "health care for all" will cost more, health care now is costing lots more, and it isn't for everyone! If you're fairly well off financially, you'll probably be okay, no matter the cost increases, but many Americans are not well off financially, and even if they have insurance at present, it is costing them more, and will cost them more next year, and the year after, and the year after that; AND, if they lose their job, they likely won't be able to maintain that insurance themselves. Or, if their employer tries to cut expenses, they may have to pick up a bigger share of the cost, or suffer benefit cuts in their plan. Despite what some may think, I'm not for government being involved in everything, but it has to be involved in some things, since the free market system doesn't always work right either!!! Remember, for three decades we've heard how great free markets are, and now we're in a terrible economic situation, the likes of which we haven't seen since the last free market escapade ended in the Great Depression.
To me, the only way to get this whole thing done is to have "single payer" health care that is administered by the government. I see no reason that free market competition can't still be in place in delivering the various aspects of health care. If you're on Medicare or Medicaid, I'm sure some can tell of horror stories about billing foul ups, etc,^^^ but I'll also bet that people with private insurance can tell you similar stories. Why? Because whether the government or private companies administer things, they have one thing in common....they're staffed by HUMAN BEINGS....failings and all!!!
On the offsets to personal costs and increased taxes that I mentioned above, if for example, you now pay let's say, $7500 per year for insurance, MAYBE you'll only pay $3500 in taxes under a new system, and you'll have NO insurance premiums.*** Why? All taxpayers would then be contributing to "the system," so expenses would be shared. If you own a business and pay most of the costs for your employees, you COULD also see substantial reductions in overall costs; that is, higher taxes, but no insurance premiums. From what I can tell, if we have some sort of "mixed" insurance system; that is, private insurance, but also some sort of public plan, I have a feeling many people will get zapped twice; higher taxes to pay for those unable to afford "free market" insurance, and also higher premiums on their own polices, which seems to pretty much be guaranteed anyway, if no reform is enacted. (A word history is below)
^^^So if you support the current system for other Americans, or want only "free market" solutions, what if we take away your government administered Medicare or Medicaid and put you on a system of "free market" principles? I'll bet you don't like that idea!
***I say "maybe," because the reality is, I DON'T know. For a country as large as the United States, my pocket calculator isn't big enough to handle such figures. To me too, just like with energy prices, there needs to be some kind of temporary cost control until things are figured out. For you Republicans, don't lay an egg; Richard Nixon imposed price controls and the country didn't suddenly fall off the map, and remember, I said "temporary." The greedy will be appalled, because they won;t be able to keep their little hands in things. That's what this all comes down to in the end folks....MONEY!
Word History:
Keen-This seems to go back to the Indo European root "gn." The Old Germanic offshoot had "kan," which also gave English "can;" that is, meaning "able to do." It seems that what became "keen" originally meant "clever, wise, skilled" (as you can see, all with that sense of being able to do something) but also developed a sense in the Germanic dialects of "brave, bold, daring." In Old English is was "cene," retaining those before mentioned meanings. Close English relatives, German and Dutch, have "Kühn" and "koen," respectively, but both have only retained the "bold, daring" meaning. This meaning died out in English, as did the meaning "clever, wise," and it was replaced during the 1300s by the meaning "eager," as "I'm keen to do something," or "I'm not too keen on that." Further, English developed a different take unlike the other Germanic languages during the 1200s, with the meaning "sharp," as in "a keen blade," or even "a keen mind."
Labels: English, etymology, Germanic languages, government provided health care, health care
posted by Randy at 12:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home